Glass Message Board
Glass Discussion & Research. NO IDENTIFICATION REQUESTS here please. => British & Irish Glass => Topic started by: keith on September 18, 2016, 03:52:54 PM
-
If I'm reading the kite mark correctly it's 1868.
-
Hi Keith,
It's pattern #1350 shown here: http://www.20thcenturyglass.com/glass_encyclopedia/glass_catalogues/sowerbyglass_catalogues/sowerbyglass_catalogue1882-07.htm with a variation here: http://www.20thcenturyglass.com/store/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=5075
Kind regards
Nick
-
Thanks Nick ;D ;D
-
I'm fairly sure this factory pattern relates to Registration 328744 dated 4th November 1878 - there were in fact twelve Registrations on that date.
Have a look at the attached and tell me if you disagree.............. starting at the top and working clockwise, Keith, the details on the diamond should read.... 4 - D - 11 10, and of course it will be from the second period lozenges. I'm assuming that the '1/2' size is just a smaller example. It's apparently described as a vase, but looks to me more like a bowl.
The original factory drawing appears to show three legs only, but am sure that's just the artists way of showing the legs on the drawing, since yours does have four, and as is mostly the case this Registration is protecting the shape rather than any decoration.
Very nice by the way. Personally I found the '20th Century Glass' description confusing........ If I didn't know better, I'd be unsure as to what to call this..... milk glass or Vitro-Porcelain or Queen's Ivory .............. I'm probably being thick, but from the wording it appears that these terms are equal and interchangeable, which of course they're not.
Anyway, let me know if you agree that pattern 1350 equates to Rd. 328744. :)
-
I always thought this stuff was vitro-porcelain ??? there are a few differences to the drawing you posted and you'll have to excuse the scribble, it was Leonardo's day off ! the numbers on the lozenge are different, impossible to photograph ! ::) ;D ;D
-
Keith - you're correct, and the wrong month detail was my mistake - I put eleven for November, when correctly it should have been K, so my apologies.
Yours may well be Vitro-Porcelain - it's not always easy to tell from a screen picture, and if so it will be 'whiter' than Queen's Ivory ware, which is more of a cream colour, and of course fluoresces under UV, to give a uranium green glow............. and of course I'd picked up on your subject heading, and assumed you had already put the torch over your bowl. If yours doesn't glow then yes, it will be simply Vitro-Porcelain, and the Mods. might care to amend the heading. Nothing to do with Milk Glass, however.
But assume you do agree that the shape agrees with the Registration picture. :)
-
Hi guys,
I'm reading it as a second series lozenge, using 4 as the day, D as the year (1878) and K as the month (November)
Giving 4th November 1878 and RD 328740.
Is this correct?
Nick
-
Hello Paul, will check the uv in the morning, would have move stuff to get to the lamp ! but it is cream coloured and not white so probably Ivory ware and not vitro-porcelain as I thought ::)
-
Hi Guys,
Should have looked in Cottle before posting, because then I'd have seen 4/11/1878 had registrations for Rd 328740 to Rd 328751 Doh!, a biscuit box it ain't. Cottle gives 1350 1/2 as Rd 328744 as per your post and registration picture Paul, strange that it doesn't show the decoration. Cottle calls it a vase, in 2016 it looks more like a sugar imho. The smaller of the two 13501/2 doesn't appear to have the 'ears' on the handles that 1350 does. There are many pictures on the Glass Queries Sowerby and registered designs picture databases in numerous forms, colourways and glass types, including a creamer to match the 'vase'..
Glass Queries Rd pics: http://glassgallery.yobunny.org.uk/thumbnails.php?album=763&page=53 http://glassgallery.yobunny.org.uk/thumbnails.php?album=763&page=54
Best
Nick
-
hello Nick. I've already commented above that the picture of the 'half' pattern - shown on the factory pattern sheet in your link from the 20th Century Glass site, looks simply to be a smaller version of 1350, although there's always a chance that some small feature that you mention, i.e. the ears on the handle may have been slightly modified. Unless we have both sizes on the Board to look at then we may not know for sure - although I notice there aren't any 'ears' showing on the original factory drawing.
Simon Cottle was correct in using the word 'vase' since that is the description shown on the original drawing - which you can see on the copy I've included above - and as we've seen previously on the majority of occasions with Sowerby Registrations, it's more often than not the shape only that was being protected. Quite possibly this allowed the factory to produce identical shapes in various sizes with different types of decoration, rather than tying them to one particular decorative style had this been shown on the original Registered example.
I'd agree with you though - this one does have the looks of a sugar bowl.
Sorry to be thick, but I'm not sure which of the items on the page from the Board's Registration items that you're referring to as 'a creamer to match the vase' - possibly me needing Specsavers again ;) I thought you were going to tell me that I'd posted this Reg. Drawing of 328744 previously - which wouldn't have surprised me.
Looking forward to Keith finding his u.v. torch. ;D
-
Hi Paul,
I wasn't questioning Cottle calling 1350 a vase, as you rightly say it's in the catalogue, rather Sowerby. Not only are there no 'ears' on the handles of the factory drawing, but as you've already said, it omits the Peacock decoration :). Perhaps they had in mind to try many forms of decoration and, as you say, were just registering the shape? The creamer I'm refering to is Rd 328747 shown here: http://glassgallery.yobunny.org.uk/displayimage.php?album=763&pos=1065 (though Cottle describes Rd 328747 as daisy pattern #1331) there's an error there somewhere. Ian's bowl definitely looks like 'Patent Queen's Ware' and it mentions that as an option at the top of the catalogue, but as the Glass Queries gallery shows an amber version which the catalogue doesn't mention, UV should confirm things :).
As always there are plenty of challenges with the ID of these things even with catalogue, registrations and your good works at Kew, for which we're all very grateful and I offer you my thanks ;D.
Kind regards
Nick
-
:-* go on, I bet you say that to all the sailors here, or am I special ;) ;)
BUT seriously - being an old codger I was slow to realize the punning decoration on this particular Registration - the word 'peacock' - could get confusing in view of their trademark ;)
sorry to say but all I'm seeing in your link are a pair of mineral water bottles ?? A picture of Rd. 328747 doesn't seem to be on either of your links
-
Hi Paul,
;D I withdraw my thanks on the grounds of sexual harrassment ;D Mods!! help ;D. Sorry about the link, try this one: http://glassgallery.yobunny.org.uk/displayimage.php?album=1001&pos=644
Regards
Nick
-
yes, that creamer in your link is correct as one of the items under Registration 328744. Obviously there was some leeway in allowing related shapes to be included under a given Registered shape, and this is an example of such an instance. There's no doubt that with its art deco style handle, upper plain band with decoration of peacock and flowers, the ribbed lower half and legs, it was legitimate for the factory to include it under 328744. There may be other shapes that qualify for inclusion under this Rd. No. - I really don't know, and don't have Fred's knowledge with which to comment, although the handled squashed basket shown in Nick's most recent link was definitely one of them.
You mentioned Sowerby Rd. 328747 - although regret I've lost the plot as to exactly why - but should it be of interest I've attached a copy of the original factory drawing (now at Kew), and it too was one of the twelve Registrations from 04.11.1878. Obviously it has nothing to do with Keith's Registration.
Just a little information regarding Sowerby's introduction of these opaque wares might be of interest - details of which are taken from Raymond Slack's book....'English Pressed Glass 1830 - 1900 ............
As far as Sowerby were concerned, their invention of what they described as 'Vitro-Porcelain' first appeared in 1877, although there are pieces with lozenges showing dates from 1876.
For their Queen's Ivory ware - which George Sowerby initially described simply as 'Ivory', there were provisional patents taken out in May 1878, and Letters Patent were filed in November 1878, so it's quite possible that there weren't any pieces of 'Ivory' physically on the market until 1879 - but I'm not sure - perhaps someone can confirm. It would be interesting to know exactly which was the first Ivory Registration No.
Sowerby's first pressed glass Registrations were in February 1872 - so Keith's 1868 piece is a very rare find ;D ;)
-
I have a matching cream jug if you want one.
-
thanks Mike - very much appreciate the offer, but will pass on this occasion............... trying to keep glass acquisitions to a minimum. :)
-
Just for Paul.... ;D ;D bit out of focus, it's my age ! ::) ;D ;D
-
thanks - good to see the glow Keith. :) At one time or another I've owned some classic pieces of this stuff, and always had the impression that the relief pattern - whatever it happened to be - was that much sharper and precise that ordinary pressed glass - something to do with the moulds perhaps, but not sure.
-
Nick, you are using the URL at the top of the Glass Gallery images. What you need to do is use the URL below the images.
Which image were you trying to link to? Was it the creamer - Rd 328747?